On Oct 19, 2011, at 6:56 PM, Adam Kocoloski wrote:
> I think you might be reading a bit too much into what Noah is saying here. I
> believe he's just taking issue with the two separate rc/ and rel/ "paths" in
> the tag names. For what it's worth I agree with him on that front, though
> I'd consider going even further (as Paul suggested earlier in the thread) and
> just prevent rewriting of any tag pushed to the ASF remote. Then there's no
> need for any tag prefix at all. Best,
I don't think that's different from what I said. Tags don't generally
have "paths" (it's 1.4rc1 or it isn't) and git makes it hard to overwrite them
because it's a bad idea and will only lead to confusion.
IMO, there just isn't room or need to innovate here. Code's cooked in
various dev branches. That gets rolled up into an "official" branch towards a
feature or release. Once a release is almost ready, alpha, beta and RC tags
get dropped in aligned with the same version numbers the server will report.
Once it's done, you can retag a commit with a newer tag that calls it done and
it's shipped.
--
dustin sallings
